Fishing rods had their genesis when man realized that he could enhance his ability to throw, or cast, a fishing lure, with accuracy, toward a selected target location by the use of a rod. Originally, fishing rods were made of various hardwoods such as hickory and lancewood. These varieties of wood were strong and resilient, but they were also heavy, and if sufficient care wasn't exercised, they would assume a "set." In the 1850s bamboo began to be imported into England for use in making fishing rods. Certainly, the bamboo stalk was itself used as a fishing pole, and in many areas its use still abounds, but the bamboo pole is an extremely inefficient structure for casting a lure, and it is, therefore, referred to as a pole and not a rod.
Craftsmen who make fishing rods are, however, able to take bamboo and carefully fashion it into a rod that provides classic perfection. Even so, the craftsman must know the type action desired by the fisherman for a particular rod as well as the weight of the fishing lure that will be cast by that rod in order to fashion the proper cross section, relative to the length of the rod. Once such a rod is built it is not possible to vary its action. One must have a separate rod for every action desired. Moreover, such rods are incapable of being manufactured by mass production methods.
For approximately the 25 years following the introduction of the solid steel rod in about 1920 solid steel rods were extremely popular. They could be mass-produced, and they were strong, without being overly heavy. However, they had their problems. They did rust, but their primary disadvantage was probably their tendency to fail after extended use because of metal fatigue. The solid steel rod did have adequate tensile, compressive and shear strengths which provided adequate resistance against breaking, but only until such time as the metal fatigued.
Contrary to what one might expect, the solid steel rod did not have the casting power one might expect. The solid steel rod simply did not have an appropriate modulus of elasticity to provide the desired casting power. This deficiency in the solid steel rod led to the development of the tubular steel rod which, though it exhibited greatly improved casting characteristics relative to the solid steel rod, nevertheless retained the other disadvantages inherent to metal rods.
The advent of fiberglass, and later the more exotic fibers, provided the means by which to achieve a mass-produced rod that had the desired qualities without the disadvantages of the then prior art rods.
There are two primary methods currently employed to make fiber fishing rods. According to one method the fibers are woven into a cloth that is cut to a pattern and then wound about a mandrel to provide the desired diameter and length. The cloth is impregnated with a suitable resin binder, either before or after it has been wound onto the mandrel, and that assembly of the mandrel with the impregnated cloth wound thereabout is then subjected to heat and pressure, as is well known in the art, to cure the resin impregnated cloth into a rod blank.
According to a second method the fibers are not woven into a fabric, but are, instead, positioned directly onto a mandrel in the desired disposition. In some cases the fibers are wound about the mandrel and in other cases the fibers are oriented longitudinally of the mandrel. In fact, the fibers are often applied partially longitudinally and partially circumferentially, or helically, of the mandrel.
During the early years some manufacturers chose to make the mandrel of wood which was allowed to remain within the rod as a core, but today the vast majority of manufacturers that use a mandrel to shape the rod blank choose to employ a removable, metallic mandrel. In either event, the impregnated fibers are then subjected to heat and pressure to cure the rod blank.
All of the foregoing prior art methods provide a rod of selected length which has a predetermined fast or slow action and which is designed to work most effectively with a lure of a given weight.
In order to facilitate an understanding of the present invention it is imperative that one have at least a modest understanding of how a fishing rod works so that the term "action" is understood.
A fishing rod, any fishing rod, has a modulus of elasticity. The modulus of elasticity, in layman's terms, is the composite effect of the weight of the rod and the stiffness of the rod to produce a recoil action at the tip of the rod which propels the lure. The power of this recoil action must be compatible with the weight of the lure being propelled, if the rod is to be capable of achieving the maximum range for the particular lure. The weight of the lure must neither overpower nor underpower the rod. Rather, the weight of the lure must accentuate the natural harmonic flexure of the rod so that the rod will be capable of maximizing the application of the propelling force developed by the rod to the lure.
Understanding the physical reflexes and responses of a fishing rod to the forces applied thereto by the fisherman will go a long way toward reaching an understanding of the "action" of a fishing rod. For example, if one takes a rod and holds it horizontally and then applies even a modest, horizontal, wrist flipping movement to the handle it will be observed that the tip of the rod first moves in a direction opposite to the movement applied to the handle and thereafter rebounds to move in the same direction. The time delay between the initial movement of the tip and the rebounding movement determines if the rod is a fast or slow rod. The lighter the lure, the faster is the desired action. Conversely, the heavier the lure, the slower is the desired action. In that way the weight of the lure will be able to apply an appropriate inertial force against the tip of the rod which will be in synchronization with the natural harmonic vibration of the rod and thereby enhance the degree to which the rod bends during that phase of the casting action when energy is being loaded into the rod and then allow the normal harmonic vibration of the rod dynamically to react and apply the maximum propelling force available from the rod to the lure during the unloading action.
Applying the foregoing theoretical explanation to the actual casting operation let us analyze the physical action of a rod during the casting procedure. Begin with the visualization of the fisherman holding the rod in a vertical plane and at approximately a 45.degree. angle with respect to a horizontal plane of reference. As the fisherman starts the cast he first flips his wrist rearwardly to initiate the backcast portion of the loading phase. With or without the lure, the tip of the rod would first move forwardly, but when casting a lure as the tip begins to rebound, and move rearwardly, the static inertia of the lure momentarily detains the rebounding movement of the tip portion, thereby accentuating the initial bend to the midsection of the rod. The force applied through the rod by the rearward, flipping movement of the fisherman's wrist overcomes the initial, static inertia of the lure and causes it to accelerate rearwardly with the tip as the midsection of the rod unbends.
As the fisherman's hand reaches the rearmost extent of its travel, the rod continues to unbend, thus propelling the lure rearwardly in general conformity with the movement of the rod tip. The accomplished fisherman has developed a precise timing such that there is a momentary hesitation before he flips his wrist forwardly to initiate the casting portion of the loading phase. During that brief hesitation, the natural action of the rod produces a continued rearward deflection of the rod tip, even without the lure, but with the lure now travelling rearwardly the momentum of the lure drives the rod tip even further rearwardly, thereby continuing to load the rod. When the lure finally reverses its direction to move forwardly in response to the forward movement of the fisherman's arm and wrist, the rod is fully loaded, and the unloading phase of the casting procedure has begun.
The unloading phase is exemplified by the straightening of the rod, the bending of which had been enhanced by the action of the lure acting dynamically against the tip. It should now be apparent that if the lure is either too light or too heavy--so that it detracts rather than enhances the recoil rate of the rod--the rod will not effectively propel that lure. When the rod "action," either fast or slow, is such that it will enhance the propulsion of the lure being cast thereby, the "action" is thus appropriate for that lure.
It should also be understood that the stiffness of the rod will enhance the pleasure experienced in bringing a fish to the net. One has absolutely no control over the size of the fish that will strike the lure, and assuming that the fisherman is able properly to set the hook, the stiffness of the rod will determine the action, in this sense, the bend, that the rod will exhibit while the fisherman plays the fish to the net. The ability of a rod to bend under load --i.e., the stiffness of the rod, can also be related to the rod "action." That is, a fast action rod of a given weight will be stiffer than a slow action rod of the same weight.
Heretofore, a fisherman would be forced to choose a particular rod for the size of fish he might expect to hook on a particular day. Having thus chosen a particular rod the fisherman would be required to choose a lure having a weight that would be appropriate to the action of the rod selected. As such, he would be limited to a relatively narrow range of lure weights. Once the fisherman had selected a rod in anticipation of catching certain size fish he was unable to alter the stiffness after a fish had taken the lure.